Search the Scriptures

Pure Words

What does the Bible say about the Bible? This question sounds
circular. Atheists wonder why it is asked; your feet will never touch ground
walking on a tread-mill. Bible quotes cannot establish the Bible's authority.
Nevertheless Catholics and other liberals raise objections on this
point. For these groups, who have some remnant attachment to the
sacred scriptures, as well as for the children who feed on God's word,
it is worthwhile to collect those verses which speak to this point.

The Bible says that God's words are "pure:"

“The words of the LORD are pure
words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.”

(Psalm 12:6).

“Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.”

(Psalm 119:140).

"Every word of God is pure: he is a
shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou
not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found
a liar.

(Proverbs 30:5-6).

'Pure' means without admixture of foreign material. There are
plenty of quotations in the Bible, expressing the thoughts of such
unreliable speakers as the serpent in the Garden of Eden,
Nebuchadnezzar, and the fool whose says in his heart 'there is no
God,' also the complaints and lamentations of men like David
and Jeremiah, as well as the very words of God: 'thus saith the Lord.' Nevertheless these
disparate threads are woven together by one Author's hand into a
harmonious whole. One Author inspired the whole:

“But continue thou in the things
which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of
whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast
known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise
unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All
scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction
in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect,
thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

(2 Timothy 3:14-17).

The word translated 'inspiration' is 'θεοπνευστος,' 'God-breathed.' The men who wrote
the books of the Bible were not operating off of their own store of
information, rather,

“For the prophecy came not in old
time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they
were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

(2 Peter 1:21).

Like they say, The Bible is the oldest book in publication whose
author is still alive." (Making Sense of the Bible, David Whitehead,
p. 14). God used men like David as an instrument:

“Now these be the last words of
David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was
raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the
sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the LORD spake
by me, and his word was in my tongue.”

(2 Samuel 23:1-2).

“Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been
fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake
before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.”

(Acts 1:16).

The human authors of scripture are mouth-pieces speaking for God,
as Jeremiah experienced:

“Then the LORD put forth his hand,
and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I
have put my words in thy mouth.”

(Jeremiah 1:9).

As we have seen, nither is this revelation above human understanding: "For
we are not writing any other things to you than what you read
or understand [επιγινωσκω]." (2 Corinthians 1:13 NKJV). This word
means:

1) to become thoroughly acquainted with, to know
thoroughly 1a) to know accurately, know well 2) to know
2a) to recognise 2a1) by sight, hearing, of certain signs, to
perceive who a person is 2b) to know i.e. to perceive 2c) to
know i.e. to find out, ascertain 2d) to know i.e. to understand
(Online Bible Dictionary).

Modern Roman Catholics and several main-line Protestant churches routinely deny these Bible truths in the
present day:

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye
think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”

(John 5:39).

“And the brethren immediately sent away Paul
and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the
synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in
Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness
of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

Believers search the scriptures and find therein the way of
life. Unbelievers scoff and find fault.

Sufficient

Is the Bible adequate on its own terms, or does it require
supplementation from outside? The scriptures are given for instruction:

“For whatsoever things were written
aforetime were written for our learning, that we through
patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.”

(Romans 15:4).

“The law of the LORD is perfect, converting
the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the
simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.”

(Psalm 19:7-11).

“For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is
light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life. . .”

(Proverbs 6:23).

“Thou through thy commandments
hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever
with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation.”

Since it is scripture itself which enlightens and makes wise the
simple, what role is there for 'inspired' interpreters?—
though some have volunteered for the position. The law itself
illumines; the law itself instructs. Some want to shine a flashlight
on the sun, thinking to be helpful. God's word
is not distant and inaccessible:

“For this
commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not
in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may
hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea
for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in
thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.”

(Deuteronomy 30:11-14).

“Open thou mine eyes,
that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law. I am a stranger in the earth: hide not thy
commandments from me. My soul breaketh for the longing that it hath unto thy judgments at all
times.”

(Psalm 119:18-20)

There is no missing piece of the puzzle:

“For we write
none other things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust ye shall acknowledge even
to the end; . .”

(2 Corinthians 1:13).

This information is not given at random, but purposefully:

“But these are
written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might
have life through his name.”

(John 20:31).

That purpose is accomplished:

“So shall my word
be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not
return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that
which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing
whereto I sent it.”

(Isaiah 55:11).

“As for God, his way
is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a
buckler to all those that trust in him.”

(Psalm 18:30).

God's word does not require the encircling 'protection' some have given it. The Lord has already spoken
concerning that tendency:

“But in vain they do worship me,
teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”

Blind Eyes

To be sure not all see what is in front of their faces. The
Catholic Church believes it is the solution to that problem, but
there is no solution:

“And he said, Go, and tell
this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and
see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of
this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut
their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear
with their ears, and understand with their heart,
and convert, and be healed.”

(Isaiah 6:9-10).

The Logos

There are many scriptures which are clearly
speaking, not only of the written scroll or book we hold in our
hands, but also of a Person, who is the 'Word of God.' This Person
is eternal and active:

“For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established
the earth, and it abideth.”

(Psalm 119:89-90).

“The voice said, Cry. And he said, What
shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness
thereof is as the flower of the field: The grass withereth,
the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth
upon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth,
the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for
ever.”

It is mystifying that Catholics perceive this as a way out of
their difficulty: they can continue to express contempt for the
written Word of God, compiling 'Bible contradictions' alongside the
atheists, while professing reverence for the eternal Word of God.
But does scripture apply the same title to both to demean the
written Word of God, or to exalt it? There is a connection between these two things
which is not accidental nor adventitious; you cannot lift up the one
while disparaging the other.

“For the word of God is quick, and powerful,
and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the
dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and
marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the
heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his
sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him
with whom we have to do.”

(Hebrews 4:12-13).

Scripture is a treasure-house that is available for free. Sit down
and sort through your jewels, all at
no cost:

Need a Bible?

Unbroken

“If he called them gods, unto whom
the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; . . .”

(John 10:35).

Jesus said that the "scripture cannot be broken." This
is where the liberals and the Catholics part company from Him. In
Jesus' world the scriptures must be "fulfilled;" things will happen
a certain way, and we know this because thus they were prophesied:
"How then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that so it must be
done?" (Matthew 26:54). But the way liberals and Catholics read the
Bible hangs on the assumption that scripture can never be
"fulfilled" unless it was written after the events it describes:
this is why they date the second and third parts of Isaiah to the
return from the exile. Otherwise, how could Isaiah possibly know
about events which did not take place during his lifetime? If Jesus
is right, then their way of studying the Bible is worthless. And if
Jesus is Lord, how can He be mistaken on this point?

The Doctrine of the Trinity

Roman Catholics often advance the doctrine of the Trinity in
defense of their deconstruction of scripture. This doctrine, they
claim, is not present in scripture nor derivable from scripture. Is
their allegation true? What is the doctrine, and from whence does it come?

Biblical Proof:

The four propositions proven above: that

a.) There is only One God;
b.) The Father is God;
c.) The Son is God;
d.) The Holy Spirit is God.

-- are at the heart of the fifth-century Athanasian Creed: "So the
Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet
they are not three gods: but one God." All four are scriptural; none
can be confuted or discarded without doing violence to scripture.

At this the Catholics protest, 'Yes, but there are heretics;
surely there would be no Arians unless their ideas were every bit as
defensible from the Bible as the ideas of the orthodox!' How
defensible are their ideas, which revolve around equivocation on the
census of 'the gods?' Their merit is more apparent to Roman Catholics than to
Bible-believers.

To What Purpose

What is ultimately the work of the Word of God?:

“Wherefore lay apart all filthiness
and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.”

(James 1:21).

From Robertson's Word Pictures:

"The implanted word (τον εμφυτον λογον). This old verbal adjective (from εμφυω to implant, to grow in), only here in N.T., meaning properly ingrown, inborn, not εμφυτευτον (engrafted). It is "the rooted word" (verse #18), sown in the heart as the soil or garden of God (#Mt 13:3-23; 15:13; 1Co 3:6)."

Verse 18 refers to the seminal word: "Every good gift and every
perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of
lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we
should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures." (James
1:17-18), as Peter also says: "Being born again, not of
corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God,
which liveth and abideth for ever." (1 Peter 1:23).

The living Word of God is Jesus Christ. The seed the farmer
sows, on rocky soil or on rich soil, is His gift and vehicle.

Tradition

In discrediting the truth, coherence and perspicuity of the Bible,
modern Roman Catholics are simultaneously discrediting the testimony
of the early church writers, who held a far higher view of God's word. These
early writers did not stress the supposed inadequacy and need for
human interpretation of God's revelation, they found it sufficient.

"But since holy Scripture is of all things most
sufficient for us, therefore recommending to those who desire to know
more of these matters, to read the Divine word, I now hasten to set before
you that which most claims attention, and for the sake of which
principally I have written these things." (Letter to the Bishops of Egypt,
Chapter 1:4, Athanasius, p. 626 ECF 2.04).

They found it without error:

“You have searched the
Scriptures, which are true, which were given by the
Holy Spirit; you know that nothing unrighteous or
counterfeit is written in them." (First Clement, Letter of the
Romans to the Corinthians, Section 44, The Apostolic
Fathers, Lightfoot, Harmer and Holmes, p. 53).

“We must try therefore and
that most straitly, writings on the Divine doctrines,
and if any should go along with the sacred Scriptures
and speed its clear and most unerring way therein, let
it be acclaimed by us too with testimonies to its
orthodoxy: but if it form its language cold and
astray and amiss, yea rather giver of destruction to
the readers, let it hear from every mouth, 'But ye are
uttering and telling us another error '.”

(Cyril of Alexandria, Five Book
Contradiction of the Blasphemies of Nestorius, Tome 1,
page 2).

“There is, brethren, one God, the
knowledge of whom we gain from the Holy Scriptures,
and from no other source. For just as a man, if he
wishes to be skilled in the wisdom of this world,
will find himself unable to get at it in any
other way than by mastering the dogmas of
philosophers, so all of us who wish to practice
piety will be unable to learn its practice from
any other quarter than the oracles of God. Whatever
things, then, the Holy Scriptures declare, at
these let us took; and whatsoever things they teach,
these let us learn; and as the Father wills our
belief to be, let us believe; and as He wills the
Son to be glorified, let us glorify Him; and as He
wills the Holy Spirit to be bestowed, let us
receive Him. Not according to our own will, nor
according to our own mind, nor yet as using
violently those things which are given by God,
but even as He has chosen to teach them by the
Holy Scriptures, so let us discern them."
(Hippolytus, Against the Heresy of One Noetus,
Chapter 9).

“We however, who extend the accuracy of the Spirit to the merest stroke and
tittle, will never admit the impious assertion that even the smallest matters were dealt with
haphazard by those who have recorded them, and have thus been borne in mind down to the present
day: on the contrary, their purpose has been to supply memorials and instructions for our
consideration under similar circumstances, should such befall us, and that the examples of the past
might serve as rules and models, for our warning and imitation.”

(Gregory of Nazianzen, Orations, Oration 2:105,
p. 434, ECF_2.07).

Instead of finding scripture so lacking in clarity as to be
worthless without an authoritative interpreter (themselves), as do
modern Roman Catholics, the early writers agreed with the Bible that
God's word makes wise the simple:

“Tarry not, I entreat, for another to
teach thee; thou hast the oracles of God. No man teacheth thee
as they; for he indeed oft grudgeth much for vainglory’s sake
and envy. Hearken, I entreat you, all ye that are careful for
this life, and procure books that will be medicines for the
soul. If ye will not any other, yet get you at least the New
Testament, the Apostolic Epistles, the Acts, the Gospels, for
your constant teachers. If grief befall thee, dive into them as
into a chest of medicines; take thence comfort of thy
trouble, be it loss, or death, or bereavement of relations; or
rather dive not into them merely, but take them wholly to thee;
keep them in thy mind.”

(John Chrysostom, Homily on Colossians,
Homily 9, ECF 1.13).

There are few things more obnoxious about modern Roman Catholics
than the list of 'Bible Contradictions' they carry about with them. Most Bible-believers have
seen a similar list — indeed, the same list — from the atheists.
Did the early writers believe there were any? No more than their
modern heirs:

"And thus it is fully demonstrated that there
is no obscurity or contradiction in the holy Gospels or between
the evangelists, but that everything is plain."

(Epiphanius,
Panarion, Section IV, 31 [51], 15.13, p. 41).

"And I have often said, and do not deny,
that God has appeared to men. For if I deny the sacred
scriptures I am not truthful, but guilty of abandoning the truth —
or, if I reject the Old Testament, I am no longer a member of the
catholic church. . . Is there any contradiction in the sacred scripture? Never!
Prophets and apostles did see God, and this is true. . . And there
can be no discrepancy in the sacred scripture, and no text will
be found in contradiction to another."

(Epiphanius, Panarion,
Section VI, [50] 70, 7.1-9, pp. 408-409).

Like today's fundamentalists, Augustine believed there could be no
contradiction in scripture: "In order to leave room for such
profitable discussions of difficult questions, there is a distinct
boundary line separating all productions subsequent to apostolic
times from the authoritative canonical books of the Old and New
Testaments. The authority of these books has come down to us from the
apostles through the successions of bishops and extension of the
Church, and, from a position of lofty supremacy, claims the
submission of every faithful and pious mind. If we are perplexed by
an apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say,
The author of this book is mistaken; but either the manuscript is
faulty, or the translation is wrong, or you have not understood. In
the innumerable books that have been written latterly we may
sometimes find the same truth as in Scripture, but there is not the
same authority." (Augustine, The Complete Works of Augustine, Reply
to Faustus the Manichaean, Book XI, Chapter 5, Kindle location
178268).

The prevalence of liberal thought in today's Roman Catholic church
is foreign, not only to the early church, but even to the medieval
church. Thomas Aquinas explains why there cannot be any error in the
historical sense of scripture. Error involves the divergence of two
things, a.) the narrative, and b.) the underlying historical facts
which form the raw material for the narrative. But both fall under
the same management:

"I answer that, The author of Holy Writ is God,
in whose power it is to signify His meaning, not by words only (as
man also can do), but also by things themselves. So, whereas in every
other science things are signified by words, this science has the
property, that the things signified by the words have themselves also
a signification. [...] Hence it is plain that nothing false can ever
underlie the literal sense of Holy Writ." (Thomas Aquinas, Summa
Theologica, P(1)-Q(1)-A(10)).

Any merely human narrator can be
surprised or disappointed at how things turn out, so he must
improvise and 'fix' the story to make it come out right. But if God
had wanted it to come out differently, it would have come out
differently because He would have made it so. Benedict XVI explains
in his scholarly work on Jesus of Nazareth that 'Matthew' (some
unknown person writing after 70 A.D.) had to 'fix' the story to make
it conform to prophecy: "Matthew is certainly not recounting
historical fact here. . .Here we may agree with Joachim Gnilka, who
argues that Matthew, going beyond historical considerations, is
attempting a theological etiology with which to account for the
terrible fate of the people of Israel in the Jewish War, when land,
city and Temple were taken from them. . ." (Joseph Ratzinger, Jesus
of Nazareth, excerpt quoted on "Irish
Catholic" web-site). But God, who is both the Narrator and also
holds history in His hand, can never possibly be in that position, of
fudging or trimming to make history and prophecy coincide. He writes
both the story and the facts. How could they ever diverge?

An elder brother concurs with the Christians on this point: "And
there are evidences of these assertions to be seen in the holy
scriptures; which it is impossible should be convicted of false
witness. . ." (Philo Judaeus, On Abraham, Chapter XLIV).

Those modern-day Roman Catholics who insistently impute error and
contradiction to the Bible have diverged, not only from
Bible-believing Christianity and the early church tradition, but also
from their own 'infallible' authorities:

“But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to
narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to
admit that the sacred writer has erred. . . For all the books which the
Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and
entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy
Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can
co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is
essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it
as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God
Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true.
This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly
defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally
confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican.” (Pope Leo
XIII, Providentissimus Deus, On the Study of Holy Scripture, Section 20, Papal Encyclicals
Online, November 18, 1893).

“These errors are being daily spread among the faithful. Lest
they captivate the faithful's minds and corrupt the purity of their
faith, His Holiness, Pius X, by Divine Providence, Pope, has decided
that the chief errors should be noted and condemned by the Office of
this Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition. . .Divine inspiration does
not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts,
each and every one, free from every error.” (Error 11, Pope Pius X, Lamentabili Sani, Papal Encyclicals
Online, July 3, 1907, Syllabus Condemning
the Errors of the Modernists).

How long can a house so far divided against itself stand?

Scripture remains the saint's criterion of truth:

“He, then, who of himself believes the
Scripture and voice of the Lord, which by the Lord acts to
the benefiting of men, is rightly [regarded] faithful.
Certainly we use it as a criterion in the discovery of things.
What is subjected to criticism is not believed till it is so
subjected; so that what needs criticism cannot be a first
principle. Therefore, as is reasonable, grasping by faith the
indemonstrable first principle, and receiving in abundance,
from the first principle itself, demonstrations in reference to
the first principle, we are by the voice of the Lord trained up
to the knowledge of the truth.

“For we may not give our adhesion to men on
a bare statement by them, who might equally state the opposite.
But if it is not enough merely to state the opinion, but if
what is stated must be confirmed, we do not wait for the
testimony of men, but we establish the matter that is in
question by the voice of the Lord, which is the surest of all
demonstrations, or rather is the only demonstration; in which
knowledge those who have merely tasted the Scriptures are
believers; while those who, having advanced further, and become
correct expounders of the truth, are Gnostics. Since also, in
what pertains to life, craftsmen are superior to ordinary
people, and model what is beyond common notions; so,
consequently, we also, giving a complete exhibition of the
Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, from faith persuade
by demonstration.

“And if those also who follow heresies
venture to avail themselves of the prophetic Scriptures; in the
first place they will not make use of all the Scriptures, and
then they will not quote them entire, nor as the body and
texture of prophecy prescribe. But, selecting ambiguous
expressions, they wrest them to their own opinions,
gathering a few expressions here and there; not looking to
the sense, but making use of the mere words. For in almost
all the quotations they make, you will find that they attend to
the names alone, while they alter the meanings; neither
knowing, as they affirm, nor using the quotations they
adduce, according to their true nature.

“But the truth is not found by changing the
meanings (for so people subvert all true teaching), but in the
consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the
Sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points
demonstrated in the Scriptures again from similar Scriptures.”

(Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 7:16).

Gregory of Nyssa explains why custom and tradition cannot be used to resolve
theological disputes: namely, that both sides can claim its sanction.
Some people accused him of heretical innovation because he used the
formula 'One God in three hypostases:'

"But they now accuse us of innovation, thus formulating
their charge against us because we confess three Persons [hypostases];
and they charge us with asserting one Goodness, and one Power, and
one Godhead. And not without truth do they say this, for we do so
assert. But they accuse and make this charge, that their custom does
not contain this and Scripture does not so formulate. What then do we
reply to this? We do not consider it right that the custom which
prevails among them be made the law and canon of orthodox doctrine.
For if custom is valid in furnishing proof of orthodoxy, it is
entirely possible for us also to hold forth in our defense the custom
prevailing among us. And if they reject this custom, it is not at all
necessary for us, either, to follow them." (Gregory of Nyssa, Letter CLXXXIX, p.
53 Loeb edition, St. Basil, The Letters, Volume III).

In other words, what is the point of citing Origen and Dionysius? The other faction
need say no more than, 'they were heretics.' So the contest comes down to God's word:

“Accordingly, let the
divinely-inspired Scripture arbitrate between us, and the
doctrines of whichever side are found to be in harmony with
the words of God, to that side will surely go the verdict of
the truth.”